SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A report has recommended that online/tech companies and social media platforms be held more liable by the UK government for the content that users post:
A report published by the Committee on Standards in Public Life advises the UK government to bring forward legislation "to shift the liability of illegal content online towards social media companies" upon Brexit. While the report's focus is on the problem of online intimidation, the advice envisages the UK moving away from the safe harbors offered by the EU's E-Commerce Directive.
[...] The protection offered by the E-Commerce Directive is a hot topic right now, one which necessarily involves the UK. However, with the UK due to leave the EU at 11pm local time on Friday 29 March, 2019, it will then be free to make its own laws. It's now being suggested that as soon as Brexit happens, the UK should introduce new laws that hold tech companies liable for "illegal content" that appears on their platforms.
The advice can be found in a new report published by the Committee on Standards in Public Life. Titled "Intimidation in Public Life", the report focuses on the online threats and intimidation experienced by Parliamentary candidates and others. However, the laws that currently protect information society service providers apply to a much broader range of content, including that alleged to be copyright-infringing.
"Currently, social media companies do not have liability for the content on their sites, even where that content is illegal. This is largely due to the EU E-Commerce Directive (2000), which treats the social media companies as 'hosts' of online content. It is clear, however, that this legislation is out of date," the report reads. "Facebook, Twitter and Google are not simply platforms for the content that others post; they play a role in shaping what users see. We understand that they do not consider themselves as publishers, responsible for reviewing and editing everything that others post on their sites. But with developments in technology, the time has come for the companies to take more responsibility for illegal material that appears on their platforms."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by BsAtHome on Monday December 18 2017, @05:29PM (5 children)
Well, yes, all the media should leave the UK immediately. That is the whole purpose! We need to eliminate dissent. We must control the resident media. Therefore, we push out all the media we cannot control, cut off access to any of them once they go outside the jurisdiction and then are simply left with the propaganda media engine we, the government, like so much. It is as simple as that, and all will be sold as a good old "think of the children" fallacy.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday December 18 2017, @05:53PM (4 children)
As I always say in situations like this, "every nation gets the government it deserves". This is apparently what the British people deserve. Maybe the Scots will decide they don't deserve it and vote for independence next time.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday December 18 2017, @06:58PM (3 children)
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday December 18 2017, @07:40PM (2 children)
They did vote for independence, and they got it. Independence doesn't guarantee good lawmaking, as seen here with this recommendation to eliminate safe harbors. In fact, independence frequently means much more incompetent law-making overall, as seen with the UK vs. the EU, and especially with the US Southern states vs. the US federal government. As for immigration control, there's plenty of EU nations that don't seem to have the problems that the UK has, so I don't really see how Brexiting will fix that for them. (And the UK, being one of the most populous and powerful nations in the EU, should in theory have way more power to set EU policy than places like Belgium.) It's mostly a problem of their own making, and it's being blamed unfairly on the EU.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Monday December 18 2017, @10:23PM (1 child)
Oh, come on. British have been making law, and fairly good law, for hundreds of years before the EU was a thing.
Look around the world at places that were colonized by the British, and compare that to the French, Dutch, and (horrors!) the Spanish. Even after they British left or were kicked out, British model governments were generally orderly and well run.
This current crop of British governance with its overwhelming invasive resilience is a relatively recent thing. Probably this necessitated by the over-extension of rights of migration afforded to anyone with a British (or indian, canadian, australian, etc, etc) passport (in decades past) and the new influx of EU-induced mandatory admittance.
Crap law because of the EU, not in-spite of the EU.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday December 18 2017, @10:27PM
Oh, come on. British have been making law, and fairly good law, for hundreds of years before the EU was a thing.
The people who made law back then are long since dead. Things change.
and the new influx of EU-induced mandatory admittance.
There's plenty of EU countries that don't seem to be complaining so much, including most of the ones in the east and south.